By James Barber of Oil Free Wellington
The first climate justice group I was ever in fell apart due to in-fighting by a vegan faction in 2011. During the next year I would entertain myself by reading reports on climate change. Specifically I would read pieces by activists, NGOs and climate scientists prior to the United Nations Copenhagen summit in 2009. Usually the article would end with some quote along the lines of, “this is our last chance to get a successful international agreement on climate change.” I would find it almost entertaining to see how much the language had changed at each climate change summit since then, that is until now.
This year, in build up to the conference at Paris, everyone seems to be showing a curious form of cautious optimism about the chance for a binding international agreement on climate change. Huge marches and demonstrations have been planned as the negotiations begin, and in Aotearoa New Zealand almost every big green NGO and union under the sun is supporting the Peoples’ Climate March, calling for climate action.
There are reasons to be cautiously optimistic about an international agreement, for example there’s the fact that President Obama has just denied consent to the much vilified Keystone XL oil pipeline. Other countries are putting forward targets as well and, while all commitments fall short of what is needed to meet the internationally agreed upon target of limiting warming to two degrees, the deadlock between China and the USA which has allegedly stalled the talks seems to have weakened.
Limitations
Some form of action on climate change is certain. What is uncertain and, without struggle, unlikely is that this action will be enough and fair enough to avoid exacerbating the economic and social problems which already exist. This is because it would be pushing against the driving force of the international capitalist economy; growth at all costs. In order to mitigate climate change we need to radically lower consumption but as Heather Rogers says in her book Green Gone Wrong, “if people start using less then economies based on consumption… will be forced to undergo a colossal transformation.” (p. 94) It is this tension between the laws of physics and our economic system which is straining and not yet resolved. To me the attempt to solve climate change in a just way, while using the present system of international agreements, emissions trading, and carbon sinks, feels like trying to push together two repelling magnets.
We have already had twenty years of negotiations on climate change during which emissions have increased, and the acceptance of neo-liberalism has solidified. The chosen market-based approaches to climate change mitigation (emissions trading, clean development mechanisms and carbon sinks) reflect this economic dogma and are dodgy at best, and the entire international approach to climate change rests on an inherently unfair target, two degrees warming, which is largely considered to be a death sentence for many pacific island states. One cannot expect a fair outcome when it is based on an unfair target and achieved used shoddy or unfair mechanisms.
The market-based mechanisms chosen to mitigate climate change, to continue with the magnet analogy, are the point where instead of pushing the two magnets together they click and stick at the edges; not flipping but also not achieving what you wanted.
Emissions trading schemes have led to a money-go round where projects which earn credits are used to support the existing fossil fuel industry. One example is the Spanish oil giant Repsol which uses carbon credits earned in dodgy projects in South America by their subsidiary, Rycopesa, to fund oil and gas projects in Europe. While emissions have decreased in Europe the business of fossil fuel exploration is still going strong in Europe and elsewhere. For example, the UK is experiencing a massive deep sea drilling boom with 150 well drilled in the past decade and more recently a survey of 20,000 km has been completed in the Rockhall Trough.
Thus, patients with hypertension, endocrine disorder, hyperlipidemia and psychological disorders when followed with http://respitecaresa.org/staff/l-mejia/ generic line viagra the intension to lead a simple and pleasant life for ever. It is true that organs such as the liver and pancreas do carry out this function and due to this early discharge the tension of underperformance also leads to erectile dysfunction which people relates to premature ejaculation. pfizer viagra 100mg In such cases, you should seek immediate medical help to avoid long-term injury. click my web-site cialis in india is used to treat male erectile dysfunction and pulmonary arterial hypertension. You may take this medication with food if stomach vardenafil sale upset occurs.
Similarly carbon sinks pose huge problems of scale, as an ever increasing number of trees need to be planted to cover ever increasing emissions, and huge ethical challenges as businesses seek land for these trees. The UN carbon sink scheme Reducing Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD+) has created a new industry affecting the livelihoods of many indigenous peoples through the privatisation of forests. One example is in a disturbing report, The Darker Side of Green by the Oakland Institute, which describes the forced relocation of Ugandan indigenous peoples’ farming practices when a forest is bought as a carbon sink.
This market-based approach has allowed the west to avoid radical change while also saying that something is happening about climate change, unfortunately in most circumstances it is just making the problem worse.
Opportunities
The need for climate action brings a great opportunity. Governments will, with pressure, create legislation and sign up to agreements focusing on cutting emissions and building a “green economy.” With work we can turn the Green Party’s ideas for a Clean Investment Bank and the Green Economy from creating a world where BP simply switches to being genuinely Beyond Petroleum to a world with locally led sustainability supported by government. Instead of big green businesses we need to push for small scale local production of our necessities of life in a sustainable way. Food, power, clothing, construction and repair, could be moved to happen locally through the right support by government. We can’t easily produce wind turbines or solar panels locally but we could certainly look after and manage them locally. This could happen if we take advantage of the push for the “green economy” and shift it to “green communities”
Since I joined a new climate justice group, Oil Free Wellington I have discovered the importance of opposing and physically blocking, if necessary, each fossil fuel project as they arise. With governments talking about climate change but allowing fossil fuels to be extracted, sold and burnt for profit it is up to us to take action to keep the problem from being made worse.
However, this is only part of what happens when the magnets flip and the poles are aligned. While opposing fossil fuel exploration is essential, work also needs to happen to make our communities more sustainable. This can’t just be done by seasoned activists and indeed it shouldn’t be. While some people may be keen to lock themselves to a drilling rig others may be keen to organise and help with community gardens, time banks, car-pools, bike workshops, repair shops, and sustainable construction and architecture.
A huge part of what inspires me when I hear about Climate Justice Aotearoa and the beautiful solutions project is the beginning of just this.
